Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 381 P.2d 167 - Bell v. State

Bell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
September 2019
most recently cited

31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably Irvin v. State (1980), Lott v. State (2004)

31 state decisions

140196219701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 85 Okla. Crim. 322 - Ex Parte Lewis · Young v. State · 1 Okla. Crim. 358 - Price v. State · Disheroon v. State · 82 Okla. Crim. 276 - Tillman v. State

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““. . . The law does not make it any part of the jury’s province to speculate on the defendant’s conduct in the penitentiary, and the awards of grace he may receive because of good behavior. In fact, the jury’s role is that of an arm of the judicial branch of the government, and the incarceration of a convict is one of administration for an arm of the executive branch of the government. To permit the jury to project itself in this manner into the executive branch of the government is clearly contrary to our constitutional concept of division of powers. ...””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The right of argument contemplates a liberal freedom of speech, and the range of discussion, illustration and argumentation is wide. Counsel for both the state and the defendant have a right to discuss fully from their standpoint the evidence and the inferences and deductions arising from it. It is only when argument by counsel for the state is grossly improper and unwarranted upon some point which may have affected defendant’s right that a reversal can be based on improper argument.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"[A] defendant is entitled to an instruction covering his theory of defense, even though under the facts it may appear ridiculous, but even under such conditions the instructions must correctly state the law, and if such an instruction cannot be prepared on defendant's theory within the provisions of the law, then the trial court is not required to so instruct... ." [Emphasis added]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.